RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: "If You Show Up with Cancer and You're 95 - We Should Say We C - RightNation.US

Jump to content

"If You Show Up with Cancer and You're 95 - We Should Say We C Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   kestrel 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 2,394
  • Joined: 22-January 05

Posted 17 February 2020 - 01:21 AM

thegatewaypundit.com
"If You Show Up with Cancer and You're 95 - We Should Say We Can't Do Anything" - Bloomberg Explains How Healthcare will Bankrupt Us Unless We Deny Care to Elderly
by Jim Hoft
“If You Show Up with Cancer and You’re 95 – We Should Say We Can’t Do Anything” – Bloomberg Explains How Healthcare will Bankrupt Us Unless We Deny Care to Elderly


Gee Ya think AARP will be running this?:):)
Kestrel...

0

#2 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,863
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 17 February 2020 - 01:31 AM

What a miserable piece of schitt Bloomberg is.
0

#3 User is offline   tailgunner 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 3,184
  • Joined: 09-April 03

Posted 17 February 2020 - 01:35 AM

View Postkestrel, on 17 February 2020 - 01:21 AM, said:

thegatewaypundit.com
"If You Show Up with Cancer and You're 95 - We Should Say We Can't Do Anything" - Bloomberg Explains How Healthcare will Bankrupt Us Unless We Deny Care to Elderly
by Jim Hoft
“If You Show Up with Cancer and You’re 95 – We Should Say We Can’t Do Anything” – Bloomberg Explains How Healthcare will Bankrupt Us Unless We Deny Care to Elderly


Gee Ya think AARP will be running this?:):)
Kestrel...


They'll say it's Trump's idea. Bloomberg heard about and is warning everyone.
0

#4 User is offline   NH Populist 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 2,184
  • Joined: 30-April 18

Posted 17 February 2020 - 05:55 AM

Unless of course, your name is 'Bloomberg'...
0

#5 User is offline   GrimV 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 9,470
  • Joined: 08-May 06

Posted 17 February 2020 - 07:17 AM

Totally not Death Panels.
0

#6 User is offline   Taggart Transcontinental 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,131
  • Joined: 22-October 03

Posted 17 February 2020 - 07:24 AM

Correction, Unless you are affiliated with the DNC or the Swamp in a position of power. Then a person like Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Jimmy Carter, Kennedy or a whole host of others will be granted the very best care so they can continue their tireless work of imposing their rule upon us the little people. Then and only then will you see the kind of miraculous cures that really are available to us if our government allowed them to be used.
0

#7 User is offline   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 33,771
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 17 February 2020 - 08:09 AM

He has added one more huge nail to his political coffin.
When he's 95 (if the SOB even lives that long) I hope his own words come right back on him.

He has zero chances of winning any states other than those wacky leftarded few on the northeast and the left coast. Southerners hate that <censored>ing New Yawk carpet bagger.
0

#8 User is offline   RedSoloCup 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 8,165
  • Joined: 05-June 15

Posted 17 February 2020 - 08:11 AM

View PostTicked@TinselTown, on 17 February 2020 - 01:31 AM, said:

What a miserable piece of schitt Bloomberg is.


:exactly:

I hope he gets denied healthcare. #karma

View PostTaggart Transcontinental, on 17 February 2020 - 07:24 AM, said:

Correction, Unless you are affiliated with the DNC or the Swamp in a position of power. Then a person like Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Jimmy Carter, Kennedy or a whole host of others will be granted the very best care so they can continue their tireless work of imposing their rule upon us the little people. Then and only then will you see the kind of miraculous cures that really are available to us if our government allowed them to be used.


:exactly:

View PostRock N, on 17 February 2020 - 08:09 AM, said:

He has added one more huge nail to his political coffin.
When he's 95 (if the SOB even lives that long) I hope his own words come right back on him.

He has zero chances of winning any states other than those wacky leftarded few on the northeast and the left coast. Southerners hate that <censored>ing New Yawk carpet bagger.


:exactly:

View PostGrimV, on 17 February 2020 - 07:17 AM, said:

Totally not Death Panels.


"It's not death panels when WE do it."
0

#9 User is online   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 22,704
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 17 February 2020 - 08:27 AM

Well, the Buck has to stop SOMEWHERE.

Insurance companies are in the business of taking and managing "risk". Historically, two of the major tools for managing risk were the ability to reject pre-existing conditions and the ability to set a lifetime cap on what they would pay out on any one person's behalf. ACA made both of those things illegal; Now once an insurer takes on a subscriber, without any tools to manage or limit exposure, for a fixed published price they're potentially on the hook for unlimited cost. That just doesn't work.

Besides, the reality is that ALREADY often times certain conditions aren't treated after a certain age anyway. I've posted before that my grandmother was diagnosed with breast cancer at 90-something. SHE made the decision to not treat it; given the totality of her condition at that age, it likely would have done more harm than good. Chemo is brutal. Even for a younger person in otherwise good health, it's brutal. Why take someone's last bit of 'quality of life' putting them through treatment of one thing when they're likely to die of something else before the treatment for the one thing is over anyway? In my grandmothers case, it was kidney failure a year or two later.
0

#10 User is offline   satellite66 

  • No more RHINOs!!!
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 5,623
  • Joined: 27-November 03

Posted 17 February 2020 - 08:42 AM

Why does the "cradle to grave" party actively campaign on the killing off the pre cradle and near grave in our society???
0

#11 User is offline   Mrdirt73 

  • Not everyone gets to be an astronaut when they grow up.
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 4,904
  • Joined: 19-August 03

Posted 17 February 2020 - 08:43 AM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 17 February 2020 - 08:27 AM, said:

Well, the Buck has to stop SOMEWHERE.

Insurance companies are in the business of taking and managing "risk". Historically, two of the major tools for managing risk were the ability to reject pre-existing conditions and the ability to set a lifetime cap on what they would pay out on any one person's behalf. ACA made both of those things illegal; Now once an insurer takes on a subscriber, without any tools to manage or limit exposure, for a fixed published price they're potentially on the hook for unlimited cost. That just doesn't work.

Besides, the reality is that ALREADY often times certain conditions aren't treated after a certain age anyway. I've posted before that my grandmother was diagnosed with breast cancer at 90-something. SHE made the decision to not treat it; given the totality of her condition at that age, it likely would have done more harm than good. Chemo is brutal. Even for a younger person in otherwise good health, it's brutal. Why take someone's last bit of 'quality of life' putting them through treatment of one thing when they're likely to die of something else before the treatment for the one thing is over anyway? In my grandmothers case, it was kidney failure a year or two later.

How about we let it be the patients decision?
0

#12 User is online   erp 

  • Undead Undead Undead
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 39,184
  • Joined: 29-November 03

Posted 17 February 2020 - 08:45 AM

View Postsatellite66, on 17 February 2020 - 08:42 AM, said:

Why does the "cradle to grave" party actively campaign on the killing off the pre cradle and near grave in our society???

Becuase even though they will never admit it, it helps keep costs down. ;)
0

#13 User is offline   Taggart Transcontinental 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,131
  • Joined: 22-October 03

Posted 17 February 2020 - 08:45 AM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 17 February 2020 - 08:27 AM, said:

Well, the Buck has to stop SOMEWHERE.

Insurance companies are in the business of taking and managing "risk". Historically, two of the major tools for managing risk were the ability to reject pre-existing conditions and the ability to set a lifetime cap on what they would pay out on any one person's behalf. ACA made both of those things illegal; Now once an insurer takes on a subscriber, without any tools to manage or limit exposure, for a fixed published price they're potentially on the hook for unlimited cost. That just doesn't work.

Besides, the reality is that ALREADY often times certain conditions aren't treated after a certain age anyway. I've posted before that my grandmother was diagnosed with breast cancer at 90-something. SHE made the decision to not treat it; given the totality of her condition at that age, it likely would have done more harm than good. Chemo is brutal. Even for a younger person in otherwise good health, it's brutal. Why take someone's last bit of 'quality of life' putting them through treatment of one thing when they're likely to die of something else before the treatment for the one thing is over anyway? In my grandmothers case, it was kidney failure a year or two later.


That's a personal decision everyone gets to make. If you spend your entire life putting money into a medical system then you have a right to use it how you choose when you are in need. They want to pretend that the money you put in does not belong to you, that you are paying for catastrophic coverage. Yet when that catastrophe hits they want to claim "oops you are not of value anyway". You were of value when you were filling their pockets with quarterly profit reports, now that you hit the minus column you are suddenly a negative balance. Why is it we the people can keep a fossil alive because she's a marxist but we pretend Grandma who's important to us should pack it away.
0

#14 User is offline   oki 

  • Always in our Hearts Rei Chan 8-30-2006 3-23-2020
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 26,773
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 17 February 2020 - 09:15 AM

Come on know...

He isn't Trump so many many people will vote for him no matter what.
I mean Trump says all kinds of mean and nasty things and is such a mean and nasty person.
Oh yeah, did I mention Bloomburg isn't Trump so that's all they need to know?
0

#15 User is offline   oki 

  • Always in our Hearts Rei Chan 8-30-2006 3-23-2020
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 26,773
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 17 February 2020 - 09:31 AM

On 2nd thought, this kind of thinking will eventually get rid of the Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.
0

#16 User is offline   RedSoloCup 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 8,165
  • Joined: 05-June 15

Posted 17 February 2020 - 10:05 AM

View PostGrimV, on 17 February 2020 - 07:17 AM, said:

Totally not Death Panels.


Speaking of which, Midget Mike should send his pResidential campaign to the Death Panels.

View Postoki, on 17 February 2020 - 09:31 AM, said:

On 2nd thought, this kind of thinking will eventually get rid of the Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.


If only.

But them being Democraps, they'll get an exemption unfortunately.
0

#17 User is offline   Alexis 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 2,051
  • Joined: 14-January 06

Posted 17 February 2020 - 10:09 AM

Where did we hear that before?

View Postoki, on 17 February 2020 - 09:31 AM, said:

On 2nd thought, this kind of thinking will eventually get rid of the Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.


Oh, that doesn't apply to them, only to people like us.
0

#18 User is offline   Moderator T 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 37,988
  • Joined: 02-October 03

Posted 17 February 2020 - 10:12 AM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 17 February 2020 - 08:27 AM, said:

Well, the Buck has to stop SOMEWHERE.

Insurance companies are in the business of taking and managing "risk". Historically, two of the major tools for managing risk were the ability to reject pre-existing conditions and the ability to set a lifetime cap on what they would pay out on any one person's behalf. ACA made both of those things illegal; Now once an insurer takes on a subscriber, without any tools to manage or limit exposure, for a fixed published price they're potentially on the hook for unlimited cost. That just doesn't work.

Besides, the reality is that ALREADY often times certain conditions aren't treated after a certain age anyway. I've posted before that my grandmother was diagnosed with breast cancer at 90-something. SHE made the decision to not treat it; given the totality of her condition at that age, it likely would have done more harm than good. Chemo is brutal. Even for a younger person in otherwise good health, it's brutal. Why take someone's last bit of 'quality of life' putting them through treatment of one thing when they're likely to die of something else before the treatment for the one thing is over anyway? In my grandmothers case, it was kidney failure a year or two later.

That was her decision and I don't think many would disagree with her making it. What we don't want is someone else making that decision for us. If we do, how long before it goes from a 95 year old with cancer to an 80 year old with heart disease to a 65 year old with diabetes all in the name of saving money?Having the "buck stop" with government officials deciding who lives and who dies is a pretty scary concept. Would you have preferred Hillary Clinton or Michael Bloomberg or even Donald Trump being able to decide when grandma gets to live or die?
0

#19 User is offline   oki 

  • Always in our Hearts Rei Chan 8-30-2006 3-23-2020
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 26,773
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 17 February 2020 - 10:16 AM

View PostRedSoloCup, on 17 February 2020 - 10:05 AM, said:

Speaking of which, Midget Mike should send his pResidential campaign to the Death Panels.



If only.

But them being Democraps, they'll get an exemption unfortunately.



That's how it works, be it guns, rights or health care they are royalty and we are but peasants.

View PostAlexis, on 17 February 2020 - 10:09 AM, said:

Where did we hear that before?



Oh, that doesn't apply to them, only to people like us.


Coarse, how better to control us?
0

#20 User is offline   Natural Selection 

  • Decrypt the truth
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 19,485
  • Joined: 31-December 03

Posted 17 February 2020 - 10:17 AM

What will Bloomberg say next? If a hurricane destroys your town we should say we can't do anything?

What a Richard.
0

Share this topic:


  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users